@tryit: There is some language that I do not agree with that is intentionally misleading in those statements. The first statement is directly from the press release so I agree with that. The second statement is making an assertion that is not in the indictment, affidavit nor press release so I do not agree with that. I'm bored. Peace comrade.

@tryit: OK I'll lay it out for you:

We have the Flynn and Manafort charges that have nothing to do with the election = Not collusion

We have the indictments for the Russian troll farm = Not collusion

We have the indictment for the DNC hacking = Not collusion

We have the indictment of the Russian gun lobbyist that failed to notify through FARA = Not collusion

Even if all these people get convicted. None of it points to collusion of the Trump campaign with the Russian government. I would classify it as attempted interference.

@tryit: OK well next time you want a specific answer make sure you ask a specific question. You can call that coy if you want.

@tryit: I thought you were asking about the indictments but now your asking about collusion. Make up your mind (unless you're conflating the 2). I clearly asked why you care about my opinion of the indictments because that is off topic and I don't understand the purpose.

@tryit: Admit what? Do you ever post on topic?

@tryit: Why do you care so much about what I think about the indictments? The criticism Trump is facing is that he "sided with Russia against the FBI". That is the topic.and literally in the title of the thread. My assertion is simply that given the history of the FBI, it is OK for Trump to criticize them, while some others are calling it treason. Sorry I didn't follow you down your rabbit hole.

@LJS9502_basic: It has everything to do with it. Shouldn't The President be able to criticize the FBI?

@tryit: Show me where I wrote that. I'll wait.

@LJS9502_basic: Do you think the FBI is above reproach?

@bigfootpart2: Details are important.